Scott G. Winterton, Deseret News
Many recent letters about the Utah caucuses are thoughtful. We and other friends also left the caucuses dissatisfied with the process, no fault of the good people running them. The system has problems. Every chain is as strong as its weakest link.
To have little or no explanation of how or why a delegate would vote, have no debate and then expect attendees to intelligently select who will represent them is a weak link indeed. Granted, many have made up their minds in advance. But making up minds before candidates' debate seems backwards.
That increased attendance at caucuses is desired does not seem to be in dispute. There is therefore irony in the possibility that, should caucus attendance continue to increase, we could reach primary election numbers but with the "election" held on a flimsy basis.
Other letters about Utah caucuses
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Our thoughts...
- 18 of the most heart warming and feel-good...
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination stance...
- What one word best describes Barack Obama?
- What The New York Times gets wrong about...
- In our opinion: Fairness for all: Religion...
- Letter: Slap to our history
- Drew Clark: The beams and motes of getting...
- What The New York Times gets wrong... 90
- In our opinion: Fix, don't repeal,... 74
- Michael and Jenet Erickson: Utah... 50
- In our opinion: Fairness for all:... 44
- Mike Lee: Tax reform shouldn't penalize... 38
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination... 38
- Jay Evensen: Will Obama visit Utah? Do... 37
- In our opinion: It's time for Utah to... 27